Obama breaking his old records, what a guy

Althea said:
I'm guessing that you don't, then.

Incorrect. It isn't all that 'complex'. More business, means more demand. More demand, means more jobs. Were you absent when they covered that?

Nobody lays off workers when demand remains high. There's no money to be made by investing in stocks, unless you put huge amounts of money in, and create artificial values. Then you can reap the benefits when you dump it...as the big players are doing RIGHT NOW.

It's much easier to manipulate the futures markets. That does nothing to increase demand, and therefore, does nothing to create jobs.
Click to expand...
I no longer require employment, partially due to the help of the economics classes on my investment acumen.
 
Ok. So I was wrong and I'm big enough to admit it. I know of literally TWO people in the world that think the majority controlling the floor agenda is "obstruction." SF and bravo. Good company you got there, SF.

LOLerpoppers.
 
[video=youtube;CKCvf8E7V1g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CKCvf8E7V1g[/video]
 
Althea said:
Still waiting for someone to give us an example of a bill that was worth bringing to a vote.
Click to expand...

all of them were worth bringing to a vote.....the fact that Harry won't do it tells us that many of them would have attracted the vote of at least ten Democrats.........
 
Althea said:
And the House has passed how many jobs bills? How many anti abortion bills? How many bills to defund/repeal ACA? How many bills to defund Planned Parenthood?
Click to expand...

and because you don't like the bills they passed they shouldn't be voted on.....actually, that sounds exactly like what the liberals are complaining about....
 
Dungheap said:
Ok. So I was wrong and I'm big enough to admit it. I know of literally TWO people in the world that think the majority controlling the floor agenda is "obstruction." SF and bravo. Good company you got there, SF.

LOLerpoppers.
Click to expand...

and, as more and more people realize they are wrong, their ability to obstruct by controlling the agenda will lessen......or at least fewer people like you will be too stupid to recognize it.....
 
Althea said:
I see. So you are a successful investor?

How many jobs did you create?
Click to expand...

It's hard to put a number on it, but personal investment portfolios are the basis for most of the business capital in the US. How many jobs does US business create by having use to this capital? I'd guess it to be in the millions, meaning Top's tiny little percentage of this is responsible for creation of a substantial number of jobs.

Unfortunately though, whenever he walks into the voting booth and pulls the D lever, he negates most if not all of that economic benefit.
 
blackascoal said:
Meaningless

There are record numbers of Americans on food stamps.

How many millionaires there are is meaningless to that issue.
Click to expand...
No. Not meaningless. It disproves the claim that tax holidays for billionaires will create jobs. It just creates more millionaires, and more people starving.
 
DamnYankee said:
It's hard to put a number on it, but personal investment portfolios are the basis for most of the business capital in the US. How many jobs does US business create by having use to this capital? I'd guess it to be in the millions, meaning Top's tiny little percentage of this is responsible for creation of a substantial number of jobs.

Unfortunately though, whenever he walks into the voting booth and pulls the D lever, he negates most if not all of that economic benefit.
Click to expand...
Personal investment portfolios are the basis for....personal wealth. Not a basis for employment stats. The two are on a steady inverse relationship for decades.
 
Althea said:
Personal investment portfolios are the basis for....personal wealth. Not a basis for employment stats. The two are on a steady inverse relationship for decades.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about a snapshot of how many jobs are available at one point in time, but business capital, which ultimately is responsible for long term job growth.
 
Althea said:
Click to expand...


the republicans have historically failed ideas.


They have them because their masters can not sell the the real program they support to a democratic society.


Its all a shell game and there are still too many idiots who cant follow the game well enough to know where the little red ball really is.
 
evince said:
the republicans have historically failed ideas.


They have them because their masters can not sell the the real program they support to a democratic society.


Its all a shell game and there are still too many idiots who cant follow the game well enough to know where the little red ball really is.
Click to expand...

To help us less informed folk what are these historically failed ideas?
 
DamnYankee said:
I'm not talking about a snapshot of how many jobs are available at one point in time, but business capital, which ultimately is responsible for long term job growth.
Click to expand...
Business capital would be helpful for startups, or for expansion of an established business.

Not as helpful as demand, which is not created by capital investment. You still cannot draw the line between record Wall St. numbers, and a corresponding jobs report.

When you put capital into a business, you expect a return. Nothing matters but share price. Not jobs, not employees.....PROFITS.

The quickest way to increase share price, is to lay off a few thousand workers.
 
Althea said:
You still can't be specific? Why would the Senate bring a tainted bill to the floor for a vote?
Click to expand...

because only Harry is making the decision that its tainted.......and likely, he's only applying that label to bills he's afraid would actually get enough bipartisan support to pass.......wait, is that what you meant by "tainted".....that it might have bipartisan support?...........
 
Althea said:
The quickest way to increase share price, is to lay off a few thousand workers.
Click to expand...

tell me about that! I worked at a company awhile back that had a reduction in force of about 12% and the only reason for it was to boost the stock price (due to other things going on they wanted it higher). We lost some very good people.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top